Surrenderist: Surrender never felt so good and easy as when you read Eckhart Tolle.

Commanderist: It may be a surprise to find Tony Robbins in a group of Integral thinkers. But this might be one categorical way where active, Carpe Diem Individualists like Tony can be matched with mostly passive contemplative types.

UPDATE #1: After showing this and discussing with some Integral thinkers, I realized I didn't have values. I re-worked the map to reflect the axis values, making this a more complete picture.

One source of possible disparity in this map could be a decision: Whose idea of the shadow do you prefer: Ken Wilber's or Carl Jung's? Or, are they similar enough? Or, is the shadow/light axis more of a yin/yang polarity?

UPDATE #2: After working with Pablo Nagel, we arrived and agreed on the following. This helps frame the height/depth question, which is of much needed work in Integral Scholarship.

update #3. Yin and yang get tricky, as other Integral thinkers are noting. In my own reading of Taoist Alchemy, largely via Thomas Cleary, I realize the ancient Chinese system is more complete (and different) than I can fully articulate. For the sake of consistency, I am changing Yang and Yin to Eros and Agape, which also are essentially the same thing as Evolution and Involution. This parallelism, Wilber notes in Religion of Tomorrow. while Eros and Agape are used in reference to state-stages, Evolution and Involution are related to the Big Bang, back and forth, Matter to Spirit and back. The big, macro-cosmic cycle of *everything*. It should also be noted that what is meant on the right side of the x axis by Matter and Spirit is actually Spirit-as-Matter and Spirit-as-Spirit, another Wilber concept that matches my own experience.